muscle suits are available !
Last edited:
Are there young male action heroes in 2024?
- Thread starter Sluis Van Shipyards
- Start date
Chalamet is 28yo. He's not a kid, he's an adult who looks like a kid. He's a Johnny Depp.
Mel Gibson was 28yo when he filmed 'Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome'. He was only 22 in Mad Max #1 (and he could have passed for 32). Mel naturally has an older look.
Mel kept on aging fast, too. He was early 40s in 'Braveheart' and 'Payback'. Ryan Gosling is that age now.
Chalamet is on top of the world today but I could picture him struggling in the future. What happens when he's 36? He will be out of these current teenager roles but he may never look very grown-up.
Johnny Depp had some lean years like that. He was a hit as a teenager and then he got huge as Jack Sparrow in his 40s. But in between those eras he was only a mid-level star. For a while it wasn't clear what his "lane" would be as an adult (other than playing Tim Burton's latest weirdo).
Mel Gibson was 28yo when he filmed 'Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome'. He was only 22 in Mad Max #1 (and he could have passed for 32). Mel naturally has an older look.
Mel kept on aging fast, too. He was early 40s in 'Braveheart' and 'Payback'. Ryan Gosling is that age now.
Chalamet is on top of the world today but I could picture him struggling in the future. What happens when he's 36? He will be out of these current teenager roles but he may never look very grown-up.
Johnny Depp had some lean years like that. He was a hit as a teenager and then he got huge as Jack Sparrow in his 40s. But in between those eras he was only a mid-level star. For a while it wasn't clear what his "lane" would be as an adult (other than playing Tim Burton's latest weirdo).
Last edited:
Solo4114
Master Member
So, first, I do not and never have seen Chalamet as a present or future action hero. He's an actor who plays roles. And, yeah, he looks like a kid and he's not especially bulky.
Now, for purposes of Dune, that's perfectly fine. Paul starts as a kid, and grows up, but he's never an "action hero." And as I said, Dune isn't an "action" story. It has moments of action, and the films do a pretty good job of showing some of that, but it's not supposed to be a big slam-bang action packed ass-kickin' adventure, so the fact that Chalamet doesn't fit the look of an action hero is...fine.
Similar story with Tom Holland. At least when cast as Spider-Man, I think he's excellent. He's got the right build, the right vibe, he's excellent for the role both as Peter and as his alter-ego. Spider-Man is action, but he's not supposed to look like Thor, or Captain America, or whathaveyou. He's never been meant to look like that. Even in the 90s when the drawing style was people with exaggerated musculature that defied anatomy, Spider-Man was still on the low end of that spectrum. So, again, no problems with Holland as action hero IN THE ROLE OF SPIDER-MAN. I didn't see the Uncharted movie. I haven't played the games, either, so I have no real basis for context. Maybe he's miscast in it. I dunno. He doesn't look like the character shown in the games, but I gather they were doing a quasi-prequel to that stuff? Whatever. I'm less concerned about that.
I think part of the issue is that, much like the action stars of the 80s and 90s, nobody wants to be pigeonholed as JUST an action guy. So, guys like Chris Hemsworth will do an Extraction 1 and 2, and a Furiosa, and want to do some kind of doofy comedy or dramatic role. But hell, even Sly did "Stop or my Mom Will Shoot." I think modern actors are way more cautious about this stuff, and it's part of why guys like Chris Evans went from doing Captain America (undeniably an action hero, and he was BUFF for it, too), and then shifts to Knives Out.
Now, for purposes of Dune, that's perfectly fine. Paul starts as a kid, and grows up, but he's never an "action hero." And as I said, Dune isn't an "action" story. It has moments of action, and the films do a pretty good job of showing some of that, but it's not supposed to be a big slam-bang action packed ass-kickin' adventure, so the fact that Chalamet doesn't fit the look of an action hero is...fine.
Similar story with Tom Holland. At least when cast as Spider-Man, I think he's excellent. He's got the right build, the right vibe, he's excellent for the role both as Peter and as his alter-ego. Spider-Man is action, but he's not supposed to look like Thor, or Captain America, or whathaveyou. He's never been meant to look like that. Even in the 90s when the drawing style was people with exaggerated musculature that defied anatomy, Spider-Man was still on the low end of that spectrum. So, again, no problems with Holland as action hero IN THE ROLE OF SPIDER-MAN. I didn't see the Uncharted movie. I haven't played the games, either, so I have no real basis for context. Maybe he's miscast in it. I dunno. He doesn't look like the character shown in the games, but I gather they were doing a quasi-prequel to that stuff? Whatever. I'm less concerned about that.
I think part of the issue is that, much like the action stars of the 80s and 90s, nobody wants to be pigeonholed as JUST an action guy. So, guys like Chris Hemsworth will do an Extraction 1 and 2, and a Furiosa, and want to do some kind of doofy comedy or dramatic role. But hell, even Sly did "Stop or my Mom Will Shoot." I think modern actors are way more cautious about this stuff, and it's part of why guys like Chris Evans went from doing Captain America (undeniably an action hero, and he was BUFF for it, too), and then shifts to Knives Out.
I don't think the pigeonholing threat has gotten worse. It has been the standard story for star actors since the early days of Hollywood. The first 10 years of their career is an epic struggle to get any work. The next 10 years is an epic struggle to avoid being pigeonholed by that early work.
If anything, I wonder if it has gotten easier for stars to step outside the familiar roles (if they actually want to). They seem to have more career flexibility in the practical sense. They can step back & forth between TV and movies. They can do smaller movies, and it doesn't damage their star power as much if the results or box office are weak. Etc.
The only stars who seem really stuck in their wheelhouse today are the most extreme examples. John Cena probably couldn't get a lead in a rom-com. But Chris Evans easily could.
IMO people underestimate how much the typical "movie star" actor can do in a good creative situation. It doesn't surprise me at all that people like Stallone or Tom Cruise can whip out good acting chops on occasion. And people who became famous for comedy, they always seem to deliver impressive results when they do something more sad or serious for a change. Same with music stars. It doesn't remotely surprise me that Eminem or Ice Cube or Madonna can do a decent acting job.
The muscles above his collarbones are very big in that last pic. That's a well-known indicator of steroids. (It's something about how the drugs work. They make certain muscles grow more than others.)
Man, some of those early pics of Tom Hardy. He didn't look like a superstar in the making.
Attractiveness/star power can hit people at very different ages. I was just wondering if Timothy Chalamet will be on the downslope when he's 36. Harrison Ford couldn't even pay his bills acting until then.
Last edited:
To your point…the next great action hero has likely already appeared in a few minor parts and has yet to be “discovered”.
Pick which one of these actors would go on to become the biggest box office draw of his generation. Hint—he ain’t mentioned on the poster…
Traps!
I do shrugs wearing my Bane mask, hoping in time I can get half where he’s at as a natural.
I expected Alan Ritchson‘s action film career to be bigger. He has potential.
How he’s not cast as He-Man already….
Is that Harrison on the far left end?
Maybe he's too big.
Being that size is great for a few roles but it's too distracting for a lot of others.
IIRC Schwarzenegger made a choice to slim down a notch in the 1980s when he started acting full time.
Solo4114
Master Member
Yeah, that's actually my point. I think it's easier for stars today to shift around, and so they do to avoid pigeonholing. It's why Hemsworth just played a nutso villain in Furiosa. It's why he's played comedic himbo roles. If Blackhat had done better, I think he'd be doing more dramatic stuff, but I also think that'll come in time.
These guys today seem less to be "action stars" and more just "movie stars."
I’m sure he could drop size if needed. It’s way easier to lose muscle than put it on. lol
Michael B Jordan is another actor who has the physique, along with the acting chops to be a great action star.
jts1031
Sr Member
I don't think a physique is a necessity to be considered an action hero. I would consider Clint Eastwood, Bruce Willis, Mel Gibson, and even Charles Bronson as action heroes, but their physique doesn't necessarily jump to mind. For me, an action star was someone you'd go see the movie for just because they were in it, it was a must see movie for that alone. There are none of those today, aside from maybe Tom Cruise. The days of the movie star in general is disappearing for a multitude of reasons, I think.
There is also a difference between a fighter's body and a bodybuilder's body. The sculpted, bodybuilder look is all about aesthetics. A fighter has a more developed neck and can perform with actual athleticism (ie. flexibility, dexterity, and speed.) The bodybuilder look, if anything, is "anti-male."
Last edited:
Similar threads
